Despite evidence to the contrary, Gerald Posner in his
book Case
Closed ignored the fact that Ferrie was a
lecturer in direct contact with
CAP cadets at the Moisan
Airport CAP from June to August, 1955, at the same
time Lee Harvey Oswald attended. Posner
wrote:
“He was not even in the Civil Air Patrol when Oswald
was a member in
1955.”
POSNER (p. 143):
"[David] Ferrie...was not even in the Civil Air
Patrol when Oswald was a member in 1955."
"FRONTLINE: WHO WAS LEE HARVEY OSWALD?"
(Nov. 16, 1993, PBS):
A photo displayed on the program by two former
members of the CAP shows Ferrie and Oswald
together at a CAP barbecue. According to "Frontline"
reporter Gus Russo
(at the 1993 ASK conference in Dallas), the show's
producer decided to use only one of two such
photographs they had."
The 1955 photograph provides evidence of Ferrie’s
additional activities
that summer with CAP Cadets,
including Oswald. The boys met Friday nights and Sunday afternoons, plus attending weekend-long bivouacs. The search-and-rescue bivouac at which the two photos were taken was held at Abita Springs, near Covington, LSA,
about 65 miles from Moisant (now Louis Armstrong) Airport.
It is my hope that the reader will remember this article,
should they come across any stories about David Ferrie (or what I say about David) written by David Reitzes, David Blackburst (Stephen Roy), David Von Pein, David Perry, or others who regularly post on John McAdams' newsgroup. His members infiltrate other newsgroups, as well. They
never move toward solving the case, and never will. Their intent is to discredit, mock, and destroy. They casually descend to name-calling and character assassination,
and, as can be seen here, use the ignorance of the reader
to their advantage.
DAVID BLACKBURST/STEPHEN ROY: FERRIE EXPERT AND GATEKEEPER
the years proved to be in error (for example, the St. Charles seminary photo, Blackburst a photo of "David Ferrie at Saint Mary's seminary" labeled as such by him, has inadvertently caused that photo to be mislabeled across the Internet (it is even labeled that way in my book Me & Lee. ).
Mr. Blackburst later said the photo is of Ferrie at St. Charles Seminary. He also erred on David's income (I corrected him), erred by saying David had no plane of his own that could fly on Nov. 22, and more.).
As most have done, for the gaps in Dave's history,I have had to rely on files, many of which were placed on the Internet by Stephen Roy/David Blackburst. He has been writing a long-promised biography on Ferrie for decades. He states he is entirely neutral about Ferrie and only wants the truth revealed.
Is that true?
I submit an example, from two 1998 posts to McAdams' newsgroup, made only days between each other.
His patina of 'neutrality' was briefly exposed,
before it was hidden again.
ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF PROBLEMS WITH STEPHEN ROY/DAVID BLACKBURST MATERIAL:
A REPLY BY MR. VERNON: "Your statement was Ferrie DID NOT own a plane."
BLACKBURST: No, my statement was that: "Ferrie didn't have a plane at anytime after his Stinson Voyager fell into disrepair in 1962." I have interviews with the people who worked on the plane, I have the plane's log book, and I have the accounts of the officers who checked out the plane after the assassination. Now what is inconsistent about that?
VERNON: "Haven't seen any contrary evidence, just your opinions based on what you're read.
BLACKBURST: "What I've read" is evidence.
COMPARE TO: (July 2005)
"His Stinson 150 was, according to him and others, out of
commission. His
Taylorcraft L-2 was disassembled."
(Reply to Lee Forman, 07July 2005 - 06:38 PM)
COMPARE TO: (Dec. 2005)
I was noting that Ferrie's Taylorcraft L-2 was apparently
disassembled
in April 1963, at the time of the alleged
Lambert/Diaz/Hidell flight plan. Here
is what I have:
He flew
the Taylorcraft on September 9, 1962, apparently in
connection with a funeral. Its certificate expired on December
31, 1962. The
aircraft was towed to a service station "in early
1963" where its
engine was removed for work, performed by a
friend. On June 18, 1963 a student
took his test flight in
the Taylorcraft. In mid-1964, the plane was sold to the
station
owner. He was unsure of the date, but he said it was while
Ferrie owned
his own service station, between January 9 and
November 30, 1964.The record is sketchy, but it seems to indicate that the plane was flyable up
to about early 63, went down for repairs and was flying again by June 63, until
it was sold the next year." Posted 04
December 2005 - 04:11 AM
QUESTION: DID DAVID FERRIE HAVE A FLYABLE PLANE ON NOV. 22, 1963? CURRENTLY MR. ROY/BLACKBURST PPOSTS THAT DABID FERRIE'S STINSON WAS NOT FLYABLE. HE DOES NOT MENTION FERRIE'S TAYLORCRAFT, WHICH PRESUMANLY WAS FLYABLE.
My relationship to Dave was unique. As a female, co-researcher, and a former Catholic who had wanted to become a nun, David, who had ardently wanted to become a priest, got it in his head that he could convert me, and set about trying to do just that. (I wish he could know that he did succeed in helping me return to a belief in a Supreme Being, and to trust in God again). Dave gave me much information about his past that has never been published, and that information has helped guide me in attempting to sort out the vast amount of material that litters the Internet about him. So much is disinfo, such as I have shown here.
I WILL CORRECT ANY PROVABLE ERRORS IN
THE BOOK
Where I have erred, in the book David Ferrie,Mafia Pilot
it is because I have had to rely, as most have had to do,
on information published by the government and researchers, with the information supplied by Mr.Blackburst / Stephen Roy that has accumulated through his years of dedicated inquiry. We owe Mr. Blackburst/ Mr. Roy a great deal for providing these records.
Nevertheless, it must be emphasized that Roy/Blackburst does have his prejudices (we all do) and I know of a certainty that he has chosen to edit or ignore material, based on his beliefs about Ferrie. Remember, he never met Ferrie, he never met Banister, he never met Lee Oswald, he never met Carlos Marcello, he never met Jack Ruby, and he never met me. He has his prejudices. He has stated to a newspaper that he suspects Lee Oswald was not an innocent man.
"Kennedy's violent death stung Stephen Roy of Brockton, a former conspiracy theorist who now believes Lee Harvey Oswald may have acted alone. "It was
kind of
like the end of innocence, I thought," the 52-year-old
videographer said."
Knowing how much he has to know about the case, that boggled my mind. he also wrote:
"BTW on Oswald, I still find it suspicious that he denied owning the MC rifle,because I believe the evidence that he did own it, while again not definitive, is very strong.."
(12/17/04)
This, despite much evidence that the rifle did not belong to Lee Oswald, such as can be found at:
http://www.giljesus.com/jfk/rifle.htm,
AND SEE MY SHORT YOUTUBE VIDEO HERE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dn-Gmrlpbh0
(EVERY ATTEMPT TO POST THE VIDEO, HERE, WAS IMPOSSIBLE. CORRUPTED BY NOISE, IT WOULD NOT LOAD. PLEASE COPY THE URL AND GO TO YOUTUBE TO SEE IT--SORRY, JUST ANOTHER ROADBLOCK.
The prejudice of the "Ferrie expert" has affected what records and testimonies he has decided to pursue, to select, to keep. He decided not to meet me. Decided not to meet Dr. Howard Platzman, who at that time was also investigating me for Sixty Minutes. Later, he actually posted that i refused to meet him. Dr. Platzman corrected that, but it was his word against Platzman's.
This is when I realized Mr.Roy/Blackbursdt could and would change the story.
Those who've met me for any length of time know I have been eager and willing to meet, to share files, information and data. Any time you read that I 'refused' to give information, you're looking at a lie. Period. I openly give out information on Facebook, when asked. And i gave my real name to the inquiring public.
Told people he gave me information, when he gave me nothing. He did
feed me disinformation, insisting that Dave wore rings and
persisting, after I said he did not, asking me to try to
remember (or else it meant I did not know Dave!...).
He called Dr. Howard Platzman a liar when i finally
described a ring that I saw in Dave's possession twice,
and he insisted Platzman had to have told me 'the answer.'
I said it had a carved griffin on it. He said that was close
enough to a 'gargoyle' but eventually refused to believe I wasn't told anydetails by Platzman, forgetting, I suppose, that at that time Platzman had been hired by Sixty Minutes to investigate
me, and he was as strict with me as Blackburst had been.
Next, he claimed i waited too long to answer his question--
when I was, in fact, traveling to New York from Louisiana
to be interviewed by Sixty Minutes, and I had no cell phone
back in 2000. Nor did I have a computer to carry along. So
it took some three days to reply. Blackburst said I must
have been told by Platzman that the ring was a 'gargoyle ring' -- the so-called 'right answer.'
That was untrue. Blackburst's accusation infuriated Dr. Platzman, who later also would be falsely accused of
offering to bribe one of my witnesses -- an accusation
McAdams had to remove from his website after it was proven Platzman never even met the man who reported it.
Blackburst initially said the ring existed. Here is an interesting newsgroup exchange demonstrating that fact,
quoting from my unauthorized book (it was printed by
researcher Harrison Livingstone without
allowing me to view its final edit, so I stopped its
publication. However, this section was absolutely correct:
"Page 132:
"Dave brought out a variety of things for us to look at under the black light. He had a fossil horse tooth, seashells, some flourite, uranium specimens, and various gem and rock samples. Dave also showed us some rings: an aquamarine that belonged to his mother, a small ruby ring that glowed purple under the light, and, most interesting of all,
a very special ring that had an ugly, fanciful mythological creature carved into its large globular form. Dave called it his "priestly ring." He sometimes wore it as a joke. It was symbolic of black magic, witchcraft, satanic rituals.He let me take up the unusual ring.(331) Dave said, in actuality, he
loved God, but this weird-looking ring was useful to him on rare occasions. Dave described how he was able to penetrate any religious group and get right into the center of religious cults. He knew about every religion on earth, he said, and had even witnessed the rites of Santeria and Voodoo. His interest in hypnotism came from observing
that speaking in tongues, chants, and praying rosaries had the same result: pacifying the participants, soothing their fears, assuaging their grief, making them more suggestible and pliable...";From page 667:
"FERRIE'S RING: Dave Ferrie's bizarre 'priestly ring' remained fixed in my memories to the present day. When Ferrie expert David Blackburst asked me, through Dr. Howard Platzman, to describe a ring of Dave's, to ascertain if I had actually known Ferrie intimately enough to be aware of a certain ring (for he only rarely wore it), I hesitated.
Not only did Dave have several rings, but at first, I was told
Blackburst said it was not necessarily an unusual ring. So I
considered how best to respond. I was also afraid Blackburst would not believe me if I mentioned this outlandish ring- it was possibly unknown to Blackburst, since Dave rarely wore it. I was asked the question just hours before I traveled to New York by plane. By the time we landed, I decided to describe the special ring I knew about, in the presence of witnesses. It was Dr. Platzman who eased my mind by
saying that Blackburst did not necessarily mean it was not a special ring. I then described the unusual ring in full detail, in the presence of Sixty Minutes host Mike Wallace, and producers Don Hewitt, and Phil Scheffler, in response to Plat man's (sic) renewed inquiry.
Platzman was amazed when I told him what the ring looked like- I saw his face.I reluctantly conceded that Dave owned a ring with a griffin-or-gargoyle-like mythological creature with an ugly face and wings carved in to the large stone. If Blackburst had never heard of it, my goose was cooked. Blackburst eventually confirmed that my description of the unusual ring was correct, though at this time only
two or three people alive still knew of the existence of that
particular ring, which he described as Ferrie's 'gargoyle ring.'
(Email in my possession)
I appreciated David Blackburst's caution and care, but I appreciated more the fact that Blackburst finally did verify that Dave owned this distinctive ring, since it shows I knew Dave Ferrie personally. The ring had never been mentioned in the literature, not had I contacted anyone who had known Ferrie."
"Martin Shackelford" <msh...@concentric.net> TEXT HERE; wrote in message news:e972ov$dvb@dispatch.concentric.net...
."..Judyth described a ring which she saw among Ferrie's belongings, to the best of her recollection--she recalled a griffin or similar beast on it.Blackburst came back asking if it could have been a gargoyle, saying (based only on his imagination) that two witnesses had described it
as a gargoyle. Not certain of her description, she allowed as how it might have been a gargoyle, though she remembered it as a griffin.The result: no progress in any direction.
;Blackburst mistakenly assumed she was claiiming (sic) that he wore the ring, and he said Ferrie never wore jewelry, but in her note to him, she had said she saw it in a box of things belonging to Ferrie and his mother, so there was no claim that he wore it...Blackburst has apologized, in the manner of a gentleman.
Martin
AMAZINGLY, A FEW YEARS LATER, BLACKBURST SUDDENLY DECLARED THERE WAS NO SUCH RING
AND THAT I HAD FAILED HIS 'TEST.'
Blackburst waited several years before saying there was
never any 'gargoyle ring.' Before that, he told Platzman
and even me that he had witnesses that it existed.
Did a witness or two die, so that now he could make
the proclamation that the ring didn't exist?
Either way you look at it, Blackburst was being deceptive.
From then on, I knew what he was.
He was not neutral, and was skewing the evidence.
Honesty means much to me. When Mr. Roy (Blackburst) next demanded me to describe something hanging in the
separation between dining room and living room, in Dave's
apartment, I told him there was nothing hanging there,
wondering what was up his sleeve now.
He then produced a photo of a toy monkey, with spring legs, clinging to the separating wall.in Dave's apartment.
He told the newsgroup that the monkey proved I'd never been inside Dave's apartment in 1963.
It would be a couple of years before I learned the photo was taken on or just after Feb., 1967 -- some 42 months after I'd last been in Dave's apartment.
I was n ow certain that this expert's information about
witnesses and photos could not be trusted 100%. In subtle ways, Mr. Roy was rewriting Ferrie into somebody else, and he had the cooperation of some of Dave's
former friends, had recorded them. It was no consolation to know that, because Mr. Roy is an expert in editing audio and video. His very AKA-- "Blackburst" --is a rather esoteric term in audio technology.
The infamous monkey photo.
A while later, I posted that the monkey made sense,
because we had been working with monkey viruses, and
Mr. Roy took offense, saying he had provided the photo,
and now I was taking advantage of that.
But why would Dave have a monkey hanging there?
Mr. Blackburst has assured others that he will find people
who will give him the answer. And of course, it will have
nothing to do with the New Orleans Project, which he
denies ever existed.
That means he has to deny a great deal more, because
we have two witnesses on audiotape and one on film, and
of course, Edward T. Haslam's Dr. Mary's Monkey goes into excruciating detail as to the monkeys we had to use.
The final straw, for me, was Mr. Roy's stating that he had told me Dave had an old car in 1963, and I USED THAT INFORMATION IN ME & LEE. I repeat that Mr. Blackburst never told me a single detail about David Ferrie.
Oddly, Dave's car in 1963, that was repossessed, was actually a newer model, not an old car.
Here is a McAdams newsgroup post about the 'car' problem:
First book, pg 299, Judyth
wrote:
"When I got back to the car, Dave was working under the hood,
cursing
(602). It was just a stuck carburetor but Dave grumbled that he was ready for a new vehicle and deserved one, for all the work he was putting in for everybody."
This one does support the
argument that Judyth was talking about a car Ferrie owned as opposed to one he was using. What is '602'?
==JVB: OH REALLY? THEN WHY DID HE SAY HE 'DESERVED' A NEW VEHICLE?==
Post writer: "Yes, I agree. 602 is the footnote,
which I provided below. (602) on page 682: "Dave's car kept breaking down all summer. He finally got a
better vehicle - a station wagon (source: researcher David Blackburst), but by that time, I no longer lived in New Orleans."
is footnotes, not finding
this one...
602 is a footnote on page 682. Right
hand column, about 1/3 of the way down. Her footnotes text is so tiny and so squished together, it's all but impossible to read.
==JVB: THIS BOOK WAS AN UNAUTHORIZED EDITION WITH FLAWS SUCH AS TOO-TINY A PRINT. THERE ARE ALSO ERRORS I WAS NOT ALLOWED TO EDIT OUT.==
There are other references
... in both her first book as well as in her latest tome. Another factor per Blackburst
seems to be that he informed Judyth of the documentation he had regarding the repossession of the car prior to the publication of this book and she left this in. Why?
==ANSWER: I LEFT IT IN BECAUSE DAVE REALLY WAS DRIVING THIS OLD CAR! No matter how much trouble that would mean with Blackburst, i described what happened as it happened. For those who assume Dave was totally friendless and that he would not have had access to a car, after his was hauled away, we must ask why friends gave him access to their planes, to their office spaces, let him make free long-distance calls on their dime (G. Wray Gill, who complained to Garrison that the calls nearly bankrupted him!) and even let Dave use their university dorm rooms -- documented facts.
These people and Blackburst fail to note that i mentioned Dave also had a motorcycle that summer. I never rode on it, so didn't mention it in the book, but it's in my emails. As a 19-20 year old, I did not know the car was borrowed. Of course it must have been. Dave's wild driving is evidenced the speeding tickets he acquired. I believe Dave didn't drive much because of all his speeding tickets, and this might be why he didn't use the car for joy rides with his friends.
It's not true that Dave drove me and Lee "all over New Orleans." There were a couple of discrete drop-offs to our apartments, a ride to a Trade Mart Warehouse on the docks, and that critical final day when we saw each other face to face for the last time. Several times, while Dave was present, I had to get a cab to go home because he had no car to drive me back. I just never thought about it. Some cab rides are shown in the book.
NOTE: The car was not his very recent model that had been repossessed. it was old. Battered. And that's why Dave had said, cursing, that he deserved a new (or better) vehicle, for all that he was doing for everybody.
Unfortunately, by calling it "Dave's car" I opened myself up to a lot of criticism. Imagine my surprise to find out that Dave's repossessed car (March 1963, just before i met him) was pretty new. Not a junker. Even so, Roy said he had told me Dave's car was 'old' -- though Shackelford and Platzman are witnesses that he never volunteered information. He just questioned me. Hust as Howard Platzman and Martin Shackelford were doing.
Blackburst/Roy and the newsgroup call my saying Dave had an old junker car for his use that spring and summer "Judyth's lie."
As for Blackburst, he kept everything close to his vest and only asked questions by email. His present contention (is it based on his anger that I told the public he was using two names?) is that I never even met David Ferrie (it is well known that Mr. Blackburst never did).
It is my hope, of course, that by speaking out, the innocent Lee Oswald will be exonerated. David Ferrie's story will help. I believe the reader, after perusing the evidence I present, will agree that David William Ferrie was murdered.
Dave's body wasn't claimed for days. Imagine how afraid everybody was, and how much his brother, by then, loathed him, thinking he might be connected to the Kennedy assassination, or, at the least, was a homosexual who had embarrassed and shamed the Ferrie family.
If David's family will read this book, they may feel less shame and more pride.
REMOVING DAVID FERRIE FROM THE EQUATION IS ONE
OF THE BEST WAYS TO KEEP THE COVER-UP
IN PLACE, BECAUSE NEW EVIDENCE AND
WITNESSES ABOUT FERRIE HELP PROVE
LEE'S INNOCENCE.
The goal has been to subtly downplay the role
and magnitude of the person David William Ferrie. His
passionate crusade against communism, his fierce
devotion to freedom, and his impact on what we know
about the Kennedy assassination are all downplayed
and minimized wherever possible by that stable of
characters I call "Warren Commission huggers."
I think of how loggers come to cut down trees,
and how desperate environmental advocates will
"hug a tree" to stop it from being cut down.
In this case, the "loggers" are out to cut down the huge
tree of disinformation, lies and cover-ups known as the
Warren Commission.
The mountain of evidence that proves Lee Oswald was
innocent erupted when Lee Oswald was conveniently shot,
in the presence of 70 Dallas police, by a well-known
Mafia bagman and police-fixer, Jack Ruby. The Warren
Commission tried to say Ruby had no connections with
organized crime. Then came the Zapruder film, showing
Kennedy's head thrown violently backward by a shot from
the front (Oswald was behind Kennedy's car, not in front
of it). The mountain of truth, exonerating Oswald,
grew higher as certain evidence turned out to be planted,
false or misinterpreted. And that mountain grew to the size
of Mount Everest when the film JFK prompted a public
outcry that forced the eventual release of faked autopsy
photos and other evidence, exonerating the hapless
Oswald for all time.
Amazingly, the desperate Warren Commission tree-huggers
are still trying to fool us. I consider their efforts treasonous,
since today we know the US government is the only force
that stands between Lee Oswald's exoneration and true
justice for President John F. Kennedy, whom high-placed government entities such as Lyndon Johnson, J. Edgar
Hoover, and the CIA's nearest and dearest knew
would be executed and allowed to be executed. They then
protected the executioners and rewarded those who
covered up the crime of the century. As JFK's brains
were blown out in Dealey Plaza, Dallas, on November 22,
1963, a new form of government came into power.
Nobody can deny that.
I feel it is my duty to speak for those who have died. I will continue to speak the truth to the people. I stand in the gap for my murdered friends.
I ask you to help me bring justice to both Lee and to our great fallen President, John F. Kennedy.
It behooves you to learn the truth about David Ferrie, a talented, remarkable and amazing individual, from a witness who knew him. Who cared about him.
Who wants you to know the man I knew.
JVB
